beyondbinaryfandomcom-20200215-history
Reality
(coming soon) Local Realism (coming soon, see also Macrocausality) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_nonlocality http://www.physics.uq.edu.au/BEC/Papers/PDeuar_aop1.pdf (schrodinger cat states rule our macroscopic local realism) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_locality "Einstein's principle of local realism is the combination of the principle of locality (limiting cause-and-effect to the speed of light) with the assumption that a particle must objectively have a pre-existing value (i.e. a real value) for any possible measurement, i.e. a value existing before that measurement is made." Probability that the quantum world obeys local realism is less than one in a billion, experiment shows - PhysOrg, July 2017 "The probability that the observed correlations can be explained by local realism due to some unknown "hidden variables" rather than entanglement is less than one in a billion, the physicists write in their paper published in Physical Review Letters. By accounting for all of their accumulated data, taken over the course of seven months, that probability drops even further, down to about one in ten quadrillion (the number 1 followed by 16 zeros). This means that the quantum world violates either locality (that distant objects cannot influence each other in less than a certain amount of time) or realism (that objects exist whether or not someone measures them), or possibly both." Epistemic vs Ontological Reality is never known "as is", because it is always filtered through the consciousness of an observer, who by nature draws an imprecise boundary between itself and the systems it observes. The boundary brings assumptions which result in uncertainties about the reality it appears to be perceiving. This fell into the philosophical fields of epistemology and ontology. Ontology Ontological theories of reality attempt to develop an axiomatic knowledge of reality, without the uncertainty that comes with uncertain assumptions. Axioms are assumptions that one believes to be certain, allowing a structured model of the reality you observe that you can trust to always faithfully describe reality as it evolves. Hence, ontologies are theories that tend to be general over many universes. Laws like the Newton's Law of Universal Gravitation are historical signatures of the golden age of Western ontological progress. In just a few hundred years, ontological models for reality had spread from boats and telescopes to computers and networks based on microengineered circuit boards made of substances mined by a globo-capitalist production market that spans the whole planet. Epistemology Unfortunately, all ontological theories rely on at least one or two assumptions that have never been found to be provably true. Such as: * What is truth? * What is belief?; and * What is knowledge? Western philosophers summarise knowledge as being a 'justified true belief', which is axiomatically dependent on the process of justification. Epistemic models of reality recognise that the process of justification is - by necessity - uncertain. Justification depends upon the coherence of a belief with observed realities, but since future reality is known a justification can never be presumed. Any justified belief can be falsified by future observations. Hume summarises this as 'past events can never predict the future', no matter how many times you drop a rock and it falls to the ground can never be relied on for certainty that the next time you drop a rock it will again fall to the ground. Real Reality The "Real" world. The "full scenario". Potential Reality The "Imagined" world. : 「人が空想できる全ての出来事は、起こりうる現実である」by ウィリー・ガロン :("Any event a person can imagine, is possible in reality" - Physicist Willie Gallon)尾田 栄一郎 (Oda Eiichirō) - One Piece chapter 218|GTranslate:/ja/en/ 「人が空想できる全ての出来事は、起こりうる現実である」（by ウィリー・ガロン）> All reality is imagined reality for organisms that have imperfect perception. Since the external reality is only understood through our imperfect processing of sensory information, our "imagined reality" is often only part of the full scenario. Limitations While our imaginations/dreams are capable of generating infinitely diverse "potential realities", our "actual reality" is confined by a number of observational patterns that materialists tend to see as "empirical facts": * Light travels at a finite speed: yet fast enough that it seems instantaneous ( c\gg 0 ). * Electricity and Magnetism behave in complementary ways, but "magnetic charges" don't exist ( \rho_B=0 ) * Quantum uncertainty is negligible on the scale of "large objects": ( \hbar \ll \infty) ) Within those three limitations, certain universes are possible and can be described in their origins using known physics of light and matter. A universe in which quantum teleportation of large objects is possible is then a universe we can "imagine" but not one that can be reconciled with the third "empiric fact" that quantum superpositions are not observed on the macroscopic scale. However, we often neglect the potential for alternate universes to appear more "empirically materialist" than they truly are. In such an alternate reality, one might find that quantum effects are strongly coupled to every interaction throughout the universe, creating a complex "multiverse" of potential realities. Virtual Reality https://www.reddit.com/r/Instagram/comments/6uvd8a/pinning_stickers_in_video_on_android/ https://www.vegascreativesoftware.info/us/forum/beta-pin-image-video-to-motion-track--112837/ https://ggnome.com/wiki/Pin_and_Align_Video_%28Pano2VR%29 Articles Taming the quantum spooks: can retrocausality solve the puzzle of action at a distance - Huw Price, Ken Wharton, aeon.co "Einstein’s 1905 theory of special relativity raised a new difficulty for Newton’s theory of gravity. Instantaneous action-at-a-distance requires that the distant effect is simultaneous with the local cause. According to special relativity, however, simultaneity is relative to the observer. Different observers disagree about which pairs of events are simultaneous, and there’s simply no fact of the matter about who is right. Without simultaneity at a distance, the notion of instantaneous action-at-a-distance doesn’t make sense. By making Newton’s theory of gravity even more problematic, special relativity gave Einstein an extra motivation for developing his own theory. He succeeded in his theory of general relativity (GR) 10 years later. GR explains gravity in terms of the curvature of spacetime, and abandons the idea that it acts instantaneously. In GR, gravitational effects propagate at the speed of light. If the Sun suddenly vanished, it would be eight minutes before the Earth reacted." The really bad news for Einstein came not from Copenhagen but from Belfast, from the ingenious brain of John Stewart Bell. Bell was no fan of the Copenhagen view – he saw the appeal and power of the EPR argument – but by pressing further on the same kind of two-particle experiments, he derived what seemed an insuperable difficulty for Einstein. Einstein’s argument took for granted that there is no action-at-a-distance, but Bell’s Theorem (1965) seemed to show that quantum theory requires it.". "The core of Bell’s argument can be explained using analogies. Consider what we’ll call the ‘Gemini game’. Pairs of twins are separated, and each is randomly offered one of three coloured cards: red, yellow or blue. Each twin has to accept or decline the card. If they choose differently when offered the same coloured card, they are immediately disqualified. Otherwise, their objective is just to choose differently when offered different coloured cards, as often as possible. The twins don’t know in advance what cards each of them will be offered, nor what card the other is being offered, in any particular instance. So, to avoid disqualification, they need a policy – eg, ‘Accept red, decline yellow and blue.’ Because there are three cards and only two options (accept or decline), any such policy recommends the same action for at least two different cards – in this case, for yellow and for blue. There are six ways in which the twins can be shown different cards (three possibilities for Twin 1, and for each of those, two different possibilities for Twin 2). Because any policy recommends the same option for at least two cards, it will tell the twins to do the same thing in at least two of these six situations; in our example, when Twin 1 gets yellow and Twin 2 gets blue, and vice versa. This means that the best the twins can do in their attempt to choose different options when shown different cards is four out of six, or about 67 per cent, on average. This result is what’s now known as Bell’s Inequality. Bell’s insight was to notice that somehow the quantum world manages to escape this inequality. Quantum particles can do something that even the most intelligent human twins cannot. Playing an equivalent game, for example, photons can get a success rate of 75 per cent. In the Gemini game, we assumed that neither twin knows what colour card the other is offered. Bell reasoned that for quantum particles to do better – to violate Bell’s Inequality – the equivalent assumption must fail in quantum mechanics. In some sense, each particle must ‘know’ what measurement is being made on the other. That ‘knowledge’ is the action-at-a-distance." Journal April 2016: Reality and perception used to bother me when I was in high school. My favourite lyric was a song by The Butterfly Effect that said "Perception of reality and what we see is not always what we see, deeper inside you'll find: your eyes lie" Looking back this captures perfectly the projective nature of observation. We can say nothing of reality without observation, but quantum physics shows clearly that the "filter" we choose to observe with fundamentally changes the nature of the observed state. Further, the recent PBR and BCLM papers debunking psi-epistemic theories of quantum physics have shown that there is no logic behind a concept of "reality" beyond what can be predicted with the wave equations of quantum physics. Hence, reality is fundamentally "wavy", there is no hidden variable giving reality fixed qualities that our instruments are just not precise enough to measure. ...the fact is that our measuring devices are waves themselves. Everything is made of waves. A mechanical description of reality in a fluidic universe is impossible. Category:Philosophy Category:Quantum Philosophy Category:Reality